Taser Fires Back at U.N. Anti-Torture Committee: Analysis

Four days after a United Nations committee declared that the use of Taser's X26 stun gun by police amounted to torture, Taser has issued a strong response. In a release posted on its Web site today, the Arizona-based company claimed that the U.N. Committee Against Torture is "out of touch with the reality that confronts law enforcement officers every day worldwide."

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Taser's statement criticizes the committee's reference to "several reliable studies and certain cases," none of which are specifically cited. And in a moment of brutal honesty, the company points out that every tool used by police officers, such as pepper spray and batons, would fit the U.N.'s criteria for torture--they cause "extreme pain."

Although the U.N. was presumably making recommendations to Portugal, which has purchased X26 stun guns for its police force, the anti-torture committee's statements followed a number of widely publicized deaths related to Taser products. Taser has fired back by posting the results of a study conducted by the U.K. Defense Science and Technology Laboratory, which appear to show that the jolt of electricity from an X26 is unlikely to stop or disrupt the heart.

That's because Taser's devices aren't really electrocuting their targets. The company refused to discuss the U.N. report with me, but as a company representative explained to me earlier this year--shortly before hitting me with the civilian-marketed C2--the raw voltage isn't what incapacitates the target. After all, the battery on an X26 or C2 isn't much bigger than what's found in a standard digital camera. It's the current-generated pulse that locks up your muscles, causing them to contract and release hundreds of times per second--the rapid-fire equivalent of one of those questionable muscle-stimulating, ab-zapping belts.

Unlike the effects of being electrocuted, the effects of the Taser wear off almost instantly once the device is turned off. I felt winded when the voltage was cut, but there was no lingering pain, no obvious residual contractions or convulsions. The only proof that I'd been hit, aside from the embarrassing video, were two tiny holes in my back, where the thumbtack-like barbs had penetrated. Perhaps the biggest threat that a stun gun poses is the possibility of an unassisted fall. That's why the Taser representatives made sure I was being held upright during the shot. But if the alternative is being brained with a nightstick, or even shot, simply hitting the ground might not be such a bad outcome.

Of course a Taser could be used for torture. For the two or three seconds I was zapped, I felt like I was losing my mind. All I could think about was the possibility that Taser officials might continue zapping me for the C2's full 30-second capability. But would a half-minute of baton blows to the skull be any better? When cops have decided to torture someone, any object has fit the bill, from radios in the back of the squad car to the 1997 attack on Abner Louima with a broken broomstick. Torture is repulsive and brutal, but requires no high-tech tools.

In fact, Tasers provide an almost unprecedented degree of accountability. Whenever the X26 is turned on, a barrel-mounted camera starts filming, providing a gun's-eye-view of the incident. And whenever a Taser is fired, whether it's an X26 or a C2, the device releases a burst of tiny, confetti-like tags, which can be tracked back to a specific stun gun. No other law enforcement tool, from a baton to a Glock 17, leaves as clear a chain of evidence. So if a police officer is, in fact, using excessive force when stunning a target, the chances of prosecution are significantly better. If anything, a Taser is probably one of the most foolish ways to torture someone, since it means an aggressor has already given investigators a major head start.

Then again, not all stun guns have the identification tags or guncams that Taser provides, and some of the most publicized incidents (i.e., "Don't Tase me, bro!") have involved the point-blank, "drive-stun" function, where the device is pressed up against the target. This creates a jolt of pain, but nowhere near the level of incapacitation caused by the CO2-propelled barbs. So there are ways to get around being caught--like using a non-Taser stun gun, for example.

It's possible that, as these devices become more popular among police forces around the world, we will see a rise in excessive stun-gun use. But for now, there's no evidence of such a trend. And if, for whatever reason, I were to wind up charging a police officer, determined to go down fighting, I hope I'd have the presence of mind to belt out, "Please Tase me, bro!"

A Part of Hearst Digital Media
Popular Mechanics participates in various affiliate marketing programs, which means we may get paid commissions on editorially chosen products purchased through our links to retailer sites.